Cardinals: liturgical abuse weakens the faith

Cardinal Antonio Cañizares Llovera elevates the Eucharist during a Mass at the Basilica of St John Lateran in Rome (CNS photo/Paul Haring)

Cardinal Burke says that many bishops and priests do not treat abuses seriously enough

A weakening of faith in God, a rise in selfishness and a drop in the number of people going to Mass can be traced to liturgical abuse or Masses that are not reverent, two Vatican cardinals and a consultant have said.

US Cardinal Raymond Burke, head of the Vatican’s supreme court, said: “If we err by thinking we are the centre of the liturgy, the Mass will lead to a loss of faith.”

Cardinal Burke and Spanish Cardinal Antonio Cañizares Llovera, prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments, spoke yesterday at a book launch in Rome.

The book, published only in Italian, was written by Fr Nicola Bux, who serves as a consultant to the congregations for the doctrine of the faith and for saints’ causes and to the office in charge of papal liturgies.

The English translation of Fr Bux’s book title would be, How to Go to Mass and Not Lose Your Faith.

Cardinal Burke told those gathered for the book presentation that he agreed with Fr Bux that “liturgical abuses lead to serious damage to the faith of Catholics”.

Unfortunately, he said, too many priests and bishops treat violations of liturgical norms as something that is unimportant when, in fact, they are “serious abuses”.

Cardinal Cañizares said that while the book’s title is provocative, it demonstrates a belief he shares. “Participating in the Eucharist can make us weaken or lose our faith if we do not enter into it properly,” and if the liturgy is not celebrated according to the Church’s norms, he said.

“This is true whether one is speaking of the Ordinary or Extraordinary form of the one Roman rite,” the cardinal said.

Cardinal Cañizares said that at a time when so many people are living as if God did not exist, they need a true Eucharistic celebration to remind them that only God is to be adored and that true meaning in human life comes only from the fact that Jesus gave his life to save the world.

Fr Bux said that too many modern Catholics think the Mass is something that the priest and the congregation do together when, in fact, it is something that Jesus does.

“If you go to a Mass in one place and then go to Mass in another, you will not find the same Mass. This means that it is not the Mass of the Catholic Church, which people have a right to, but it is just the Mass of this parish or that priest,” he said.

“Fr Bux said that too many modern Catholics think the Mass is something that the priest and the congregation do together when, in fact, it is something that Jesus does.

“If you go to a Mass in one place and then go to Mass in another, you will not find the same Mass. This means that it is not the Mass of the Catholic Church, which people have a right to, but it is just the Mass of this parish or that priest,” he said.

Just imagine: If you could go to Mass, anywhere in your own country, or in even anywhere in the world, and hear the same Mass in the same language on either occasion, and you could be sure that Jesus, not some Presider, were at the centre of that Mass – wouldn’t that be just wonderful?

Pardon me for asking, but isn’t that how it used to be before the Second Vatican Council?

If these two Cardinals and Fr. Bux can see that, why cannot the rest of the Cardinals and Bishops and priests?

Something wrong somewhere, surely?

Doc2lorenz

Dear Friend;

It is a fact that every Priest or presider can chose how he wants to present the Novus Ordo Service, which is a by product of VII, a false council.

Yes before VII all Priests said the same Mass, which was codified by Pope St. Pius V, but Novus Ordo changed all that by having 4 Lutherans, 4 Church of England, and 4 Questionable Rc on the council to set up Novus Ordo Service, to please the Protestants and not the RC’s

We belong to a group, which is trying to bring back the Tridentine Mass, whether in Latin or in Language of the congregation

How true this is. The “priests” mass or “congregation’s” mass where each parish did its own thing helped propel me cross the Tiber from Canterbury.

Charleswoodbury

Well, DUH-AH…Some 45 years after these leaders of our church ripped out our alter rails, moved the tabernacle containing Jesus to a broom closet, followed the lead of another renegade bishop and allowed Holy Communion in the hand, stopped genuflecting towards Jesus in the tabernacle when it could be found, and allowed or encouraged thunderous chit-chat & greetings before mass in what WAS a house of prayer, have finally noticed what their efforts at innovation has accomplished.

st Bosco

I think its funny. People fighting over which empty ritual is better than another hollow ritual. Jesus said; follow me. He didnt have any golden cups or a table with trinkets on it. If He didnt, why should we?

Charleswoodbury

re: St. Bosco- It’s not about the ritual and it isn’t funny.
It’s about Jesus being ignored in His own house. It’s about Him waiting for us all week, then seeing us enter His house and treating Him with indifference.

Anonymous

You’re right, Jesus did say “follow me” and He founded a Church and endowed it with divine insight so that everyone knew exactly how to follow Him. Jesus may have taken the form of a poor carpenter while on earth, but once His divine mission was accomplished and He arose in glory He was no longer a poor carpenter but rather King of kings and Lord of lords. He should, therefore, be treated accordingly.

Would you invite the queen to your house and present her with tea in a mug? No, you would put out your finest china cups as a mark of respect and honour to your visitor. If that’s the way any normal person would treat an earthly monarch, dosn’t the King of all creation deserve the very best treasures we can offer? It is in the nature of human beings to want to give people they love the very best of everything, so why should Our Lord be treated as less than human? The arguments of you Protestants are really ridiculous.

Anonymous

There is no way that the Novus Ordo Mass can be celebrated with Jesus at its centre because it was not constructed that way. It was constructed to hint at the Protestant congregational meal. The Tridentine Mass alone has Jesus at its centre with no possibility of any other interpretation. Only when this is acknowledged and the Mass of the saints and martyrs is restored once more to its primary place as the ordinary liturgical form of the Church can we hope to see an end to this continuing catastrophic loss of faith amongst Catholics.

But there is another aspect to all of this, which is that the Pope, the Cardinals and the bishops need to return to a proper exercise of their authority in dealing with dissent and heresy. There’s no point in bewailing a loss of faith or, in the Pope’s case, trying to discourage the abuse of Communion in the hand, by uttering a few sorrowful words and trying to show by example. No, they have to step in and say enough is enough, it stops now! Catholic militancy has gone from our shepherds and that’s why the flock are scattered to the four winds.

Anonymous

Another sedevacantist nut! Where do you people come from? Pope Pius XIII? What bedsit did he have as his apostolic palace? Truly, you people need to get a grip on reality.

Now here’s a thought: If all the Popes from Pius XII have been antipopes, what then becomes of all the Cardinals they elevated to meet in conclave to elect future Popes? By your estimation these Cardinals are not truly Cardinals, which means that they cannot elect a Pope, which means the hierarchy of the Church has effectively disintegrated, which means Our Lord’s promise that the gates of Hell will not prevail was false, which means the Church is now no longer a visible entity on earth for most people, which means that those outside of your handful of weary willies are damned for all eternity. You see where you madness takes you. Get a life!

The Conciliar Popes may have erred in matters that the Church will one day have to review, but they are still validly elected Successors of St. Peter.

Concerning possible Papal errors. Even if you were right in your assumption that the Conciliar Popes have fallen into heresy, how can you distinguish whether that heresy is material or formal. Material heresy, for example, is not wilful and therefore not punishable in the way that formal heresy is. Formal heresy is wilful and worthy of the severest penalties, but declaring formal heresy, especially against a Pope, is something that no subordinate in the Church has a right to do because it requires a judgment on the disposition of the soul of the one accused. Who will judge Peter a formal, wilful heretic? Not I!

Sedevacantists proceeds from the belief that the Conciliar Popes have been, and are yet, evil wicked men intent on the destruction of Christ’s Church. But how can they possibly know that unless they have an insight into the souls of men? The entire sedevacantist thing is a farce based on anger and pride. Little wonder, then, that Fr. Malachi Martin said that the unrepentent sedevacantist will never see the face of God.

I am the first to say that the Conciliar Popes have erred with ecumenism, interfaith dialogue and other matters which are either not to be found in sacred tradition or are condemned by it, but I will nevertheless maintain to my death that where Peter is, there is the Church.

crouchback

Well said Martyjo…

At a recent funeral mass, I was talking to two of my cousins, both slightly older than me, all three of us could remember the Traditional Mass…just….one of my cousins remarked that the priest had “an authority” about him that you don’t see now a days…..that’s because they have lost all authority…

As Archbishop Lefebvre said…..”They tried to make A Church for the Poor…..all they succeeded in doing was make a Poor church”…think about it…it is obvious…and True….

crouchback

Liturgical Abuse weakens the Faith…..

Who’d ‘ave thunk it….???

Request to all the Bishops of Scotland, England, Ireland, and Wales……

Come on guys lets ‘fess up tell everyone in your Diocese…or even, look out your Diocesan files…Diocesan Lourdes Groups etc…etc…etc…and post pictures and Video’s of liturgical abuses that your Diocese have committed at Lourdes these last 40 years…right here….Like Mickey Rooney and Judy Garland, used to do …… we can put a show on right here…….

Don’t be shy…. some of the Laity are too dumb and ignorant to know what Liturgical Abuse is….they might think it’s something…Less serious…..something that people can be Jailed for…..No…No…No….we all know it’s worse than that…this is something that kills the Mass…Guitars..and Liturgical Dancing….and sing – a – long – a – liturgy….where we need a Tex Ritter type priest to conduct mass like a Square Dance…..

I’ve seen all these things from Diocese from all parts of these Islands at Lourdes…I even have my own treasured pictures….but being a crusty old Traditionalist, I don’t want to set the ball rolling……

Wha’da ya say……Lights…..Cameras…..ACTION…I’m not exactly shure this is at Lourdes, but it looks and sounds as if it should have been…..and there is even an Oecumenical dimension….if you look carefully….roll the film……

My husband and I attended a mass in a Catholic church close to home recently, and were very surprised that the resident priest did not offer wine with the Eucharist. I am very disappointed at the many changes that have been introduced in the Catholic church. Depriving the faithful in the participation of the symbolic offering of the Blood of Christ is wrong.

Charleswoodbury

Crouchback, your stuff’s a scream. If only the subject matter above weren’t so serious…….

John francis Luke Siple

Sad, but true. Reverences, genuflections, Quick-talking us through the Gloria & Credo, and no time for reflection before selling the raffle tickets all tell us that our act of worship is truly not shared by the main Celebrant! If there ever was need for liturgical reform it is now, before we all leave to find a more reverent congregation!
St. Eugene Cathedral, Santa Rosa, CA

Tomas Ungar

I have learned three languages in my short lifetime, and I can very precisely point to the mass as the most helpful in this. Not only to learn a new language in a different country, but to be embraced in the same atmosphere of solidarity and family. I consider myself firstly the citizen of the church before all others. I understand everything that goes on in the liturgy, even though its a different language. The same goes to teching catequesis to immigrant children in the language of their motherland. The concept can be translated into a different language very easily.

Alban

I have to agree with the cardinal’s comments. It is not so much about what the celebrant says but the way he says it. As a convert to Roman Catholicism I am horrified at the way some parish priests say the mass and this also embraces a disregard for the rubrics. It seems to me that the obligation to attend is overridden by a compelling urge to get mass over and done with in the quickest possible time. Luckily I attend mass in a monastic institution where quite correctly the liturgy is said/sung with reverence and dignity. I have timed a local parish priest who frequently gets low mass and dismissal completed inside 16 minutes.

Peter

The Cardinal has hit the nail on the head. In our parish there have been instances of liturgical abuse, especially when it comes to the homily. In the place of the homily which should be given by a priest or deacon and which is obligatory on Sundays, there have been occasions where, instead of the priest, we have had lay persons either preaching or making pastoral announcements.

The homily is a part of the sacred liturgy and on Sundays the congregation has a right to hear the inspired word of God from a consecrated minister reflecting on the Scriptures.

James Crawford

I am old enough to remember Catholic worship before the Novus Ordo replaced the old Mass. In the nineteen fifties I was a teen-age Anglican and a prolific and promiscuous churchgoer. I attended Catholic churches on many occasions. Invariably the standard of worship was well below that which I experienced in Anglican, even “low” Anglican, churches and could not compare with that which I encountered in “high” churches. More often than not the liturgy was gabbled through as quickly as possible, the ceremonial was sloppy and shambolic and the music was provided by a cats’ chorus. On more than one occasion a collection was being taken at the moment of the elevation. As for the congregations, there was no participation and they seemed on the whole uninterested in what was happening at the altar, intent only on notching up as many decades of the rosary as they could manage. Admittedly I am talking about northern, mainly working class, parishes and things may have been different in London, although not necessarily in the rest of the South East. In the nineteen thirties the writer Radcliffe Hall and her companion Lady Una Troubridge complained several times to the Bishop of Southwark about the slipshod manner in which the Mass was celebrated in the Sussex parish of Rye!

tom

@Silvana-What do you mean by “symbolic” offerering where you say “Depriving the faithful in the participation of the symbolic offering of the Blood of Christ is wrong”.

Wiserone

I think the first thing we need to do is turn the Celebrant around so we can all face Jesus. This will give everyone, right from the start, a truer sense of why we are all gathered together. Then, hopefully, the abuses will be more obvious and repugnant to everyone and thus easier to eliminate.

Harald Kvam

I agree entirely with the two Cardinals. I live in Spain and go regularly to Mass in my local church. The respect for the traditions of Mass and its liturgical rituals are far from what I used to experience in the UK. I wish Cardinal Cañizares would do more to make his clergy conform to a correct ritual.
H Kvam
Malaga

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=668350880 Gabriel Espinosa

“If we err by thinking we are the centre of the liturgy, the Mass will lead to a loss of faith.”

Just astounding that it took them all of 40+ years to figure this out! Many of us faithful have been hollering about this to deaf ecclesiastical ears and blind ecclesiastical eyes. What suddenly opened both ears and eyes? Could it be less o…f a jingle in the collection baskets? Utterly unbelievable!!!

Momlafond

It is obvious that by saying “symbolic” regarding the wine at mass there is a disconnect. Catholic teaching is that the host and wine are consecrated, and BECOME the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ. If you are saying it is symbolic you are not a Catholic, and by attending a Catholic mass, expecting to partake of that Sacred Species, THAT is the very abuse that the Cardinals are speaking of. The congregation’s participation is internal, not external. They are present to witness the offering, not to offer in actuality as the priest effects the Eucharist. The Cardinals are pointing to the manner in which the priest must conduct that offering, and lead the congregation to an inner participation. If he does not offer a reverent mass, he can effectively weaken his congregation’s faith.

Ann Asher

“If you go to a Mass in one place and then go to Mass in another, you will not find the same Mass. This-means- that- it -is -not -the -Mass -of -the -Catholic -Church”
Amen. Amen. Amen,

Ian

As a recent pre-convert from the C of E, I am concerned by the rapid celebration of the eucharist at my local catholic church. It isn’t exactly irreverent, but very ‘off-the-cuff”, and let’s get it over with. The music/hymns are awful too!!

Ann Asher

The Eucharist under both forms is the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ. In no manner is this a symbolic sharing – it is actual.
It has never been in the rubrics of the Church to regularly offer the Cup to the Faithful. This is permitted according to the current General Instruction of the Roman Missal only on special occasions. The ” Faithful” are not deprived and do not feel as such – knowing and believing that Christ’s fullness ( Body -and Blood …etc) are received under the appearance of bread alone. Therefore it remains an unnecessary risk of spilling Our Lord’s Precious Blood by administering the cup to all the faithful at every Mass. Even more so when this is done by laity scattered about precariously. The excessive use of unauthorized EMHC’s and frequent distribution via the Cup are in fact liturgical abuses that have weakened and confounded faith in the Eucharist. The very problem the article and book address.

Secondly, I find it troubling that persons who are not Catholic have such audacity to believe they have right to chime in on liturgical rules where even Catholic laity have no right to question. If you are serious about inquiry of the Faith then please seek guidance from a sound Catholic Priest and … Seek ye first to understand.

Ann Asher

” As often as you do this, you will do it as a commemoration of Me.”
Jesus Christ, Last Supper, Wooden goblets of a carpenter, circa 33 AD. Conveying His Humanity and His Divinity through the use of common goods by The Uncommon Person.

We use our best materials for the worship of God – to convey His Majesty. Gold, other fine metals. We use durable materials for worship of God – to convey His eternity, His unbreakable love. We receive Him into ourselves physically to be united through His physical existence with His eternal existence.

The Mass Explained – Msgr Moorman

Brian McCall

Fr Bux states: “If you go to a Mass in one place and then go to Mass in another, you will not find the same Mass. This means that it is not the Mass of the Catholic Church, which people have a right to, but it is just the Mass of this parish or that priest.” The reverend Father should follow the logical conclusion of this statement. The New Ordo of Mass promulgated in 1970 is designed to have this very effect that he condemns. By authorizing translation in local lanagues and incorporating a multiplicity of “options” there is no Catholic Mass if this Rite is used but only the local Mass as opted for by the local liturgical committee. These observations led the eminent liturgist Klaus Gamber to conclude decades ago that the Roman Rite no longer exists. The very defintion of the New Mass contained in its General Instruction promotes the idea that the Mass is something the “presider” and “people” do. (GIRM no. 17). Only in the Catholic Liturgy (both Roman and Eastern) as slowly formed for centuries and not by committees, will the Cardinals and Father Bux find the values they wish to see permeate the Holy Sacrifice.

Cjkeeffe

That’s because many of them do it themselves as they think the liturgy is something they should be allowed to be inspired to innovate. Rather then the laity have a de facto right to receive the liturgy of the church as the church teaches it.

Christopher

With the greatest respect, much of what you write is not accurate.

If you say that Vatican II was a “false council” then you deny the long established teaching that the Holy Spirit preserves the Church from error. Only the Church, through the gift of Christ, has authority to say what is erronious in terms of teaching. From visting the website you list, I see that you are not in communion with the See of Peter, but belong to an organisation called the “Remnant Catholic Church” and actually believe to have elected your own pope. I have no doubt that you are sincere, but also believe that you are sadly, tragically, mistaken.

Non-Catholics were invited to the Council purely as observers and in some (but not all) cases took part in the discussion groups. However, none had voting rights, so to say that they were “..on the Counci” is quite simply wrong. This is myth (well, actually not a myth but a lie) perpetuated by those who consider themselves to know more than the successors of the apostoles.

You are also incorrect in saying that “..all priests said the same Mass, which was codified by Pope St Pius V”. We Eastern Rite Catholics participate in a Divine Liturgy much older than Pius V, and rather different in structure.

Stephen

Ah, there is nothing like a “Catholic” who thinks that he knows how the pope and the bishops should do their job. Perhaps you should enter the seminary, become ordained and work you way up the ladder to being elected pope (presuming that the Holy Spirit agrees); then you’ll be able to exercise authority. Yeah. Here’s to the future Pope Martyjo (hmm. You might have to change that name)

Stephen

Hmm, seems like I have read almost the exact same post from you before, including the comment from the renegade “I know better than the Pope” Lefebvre…but ages ago…you must go to lots of funeral masses with your cousins. If you keep repeating the same story, people will wise up to you.

Stephen

Silvana, Catholic teaching is that in Communion we receive the Body and Blood of Christ. It is not the physical Body and Blood that walked on the Earth, but it is not merely symbolic as during the Mass the Holy Spirit changes the substance of the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ.

As for the priest not offering both the Body and Blood of Christ, it is not mandatory in the Roman Rite, but is is highly recommended and laudible. Our priest always offers both as Christ Himself did.

Parepidemos

Your comment that the Ordinary Form is constructed along the lines of a Protestant meal is very similar to what the schismatic SSPX folk say and is utter balderdash and a denial of core Catholic teaching. Even a cursory reading of the texts shows that the prayers clearly proclaim the sacrificial nature of the Mass.

By the way, you are correct that Christ is not the centre of the Ordinary Form of the Mass, but neither is He the centre of the Extraordinary Form. Orthodox Catholic teaching is that the Mass is the offering of Christ to the Father. Thus, it is the Father, not Christ, Who is the centre of the celebration of the Mass as it is to the Father that the prayers are directed.

You will note that I do not write “Jesus” as you have done, but “Christ”. We do not receive “Jesus” in Communion, but “Christ” which is why the priest does not say “The Body of Jesus”. Jesus was the incarnation of the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, the human being who walked this Earth with all the attendant characteristics. It is the Body and Blood of the resurrected Christ, the Anointed of the Father, that we receive in Communion. This may seem like sllitting hairs, but it is an important Christological distinction.

Anonymous

You have obviously not read Mgr. Bugnini’s comments before and after he created the New Mass with the assistance of six Protestant ministers. You have obviously not read the praises of leading Protestants of the time either, who declared their delight with the suppression of an obvious sacrifice in the New Mass. I suggest you read up on these matters before making silly comments. And here’s a link to show just how the wording was altered to suit Protestants in the New Mass: http://www.catholictruthscotland.com/DanGrahamMassdifferences.pdf

Your hair splitting over who is at the centre of the Mass is really quite childish. We know that the sacrifice of Our Lord is offered to the Father for the remission of sins, but it is upon the face of Christ crucified that we fix our attention as we offer ourselves to the Father with Him. The Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are one God, not three Gods. They are one and the same: “who sees me, sees the Father.” I would like some quotes from this “Orthodox teaching” you speak of that says Christ’s sacrifice is not actually the centre of the Catholic Mass. Any chance of some clear statements on that?

As for your attempt to separate the name “Jesus” from “Christ,” as if the former is less holy when pronounced without use of the latter, that’s just ridiculous. The Sacred Heart of JESUS is the Blessed Sacrament, the litany of the Holy Name lists many invocations using just JESUS, etc. By the way, it is heresy to suggest that the human Jesus is distinct in any way from the divine Christ. That is one of the modernist propositions condemned in the Syllabus of St, Pius X. Have you never heard of the hypostatic union?

Peter

“too many modern Catholics think the Mass is something that the priest and the congregation do together when, in fact, it is something Jesus does.” Vatican II declared that at the celebration of the liturgy of the Word and the liturgy of the Eucharist our Lord and Savior Jesus is really present in the priest, the laity, the proclamation of sacred scripture and most profoundly in the Eucharist. Jesus died for us that we might be ‘one as He and the Father are one.’ So, it is incomplete to say that ‘only Jesus’ is acting in the celebration of the holy Mass. We by grace through faith in Jesus Christ have been made temples of the Holy Spirit at baptism. Pope John Paul II emphasized this point further by saying that we ‘Receive the Eucharist so that we might become Eucharist so that we might bring the Eucharist to the world.” The early Masses the Christian community understood the Pauline notion of the body of Christ. We are enfleshed souls that have been filled with the Holy Spirit, our bodies are not our own but Christ living in and through us even as we remain a unique person in that unity. This article could leave the false impression that Jesus is wholly separate from us at Mass–and in fact, Jesus died that we might be ‘one’ with the Father and the Spirit.

Regpchef

I would think that a call to the Bishop would be in order. Lay people should also “know” that it is not right for them to do.

crouchback

No I’ve only ever been to two Traditional Funerals, and my cousins have only ever been to one, the one I’m talking about…but there reaction to the mass was startling, they never attend Traditional Masses…so I think the story was worth repeating…

By the by haven’t I noticed that tired old line “Lefebvre knows better than the Pope” somewhere before..?? maybe you should stop ….Regurgitating past slanders..??

Tell us some thing bright and breezy about the exciting renewal of the church…..What about the return of the Sedia Gestatoria….not for the Pope…..for old ladies who happen to be what my Old man ….he of the oft repeated funeral….used to call Host Humphers…and Special Flumps…..go on we’re waiting….

crouchback

Your comment comes to life in the Traditional Mass….

The Novus Ordo strangles the life out of all these things……..We might “become Eucharist”….????

The Traditional Mass is…”No nonsense”…straight to the point. The Novus Ordo gets so bogged down with “becoming”…..that the Church falls flat on it’s face before the Priest leaves the Sanctuary. We clearly see that the disintegration of the church stems from the “Man centered becoming” of the Novus Ordo, rather than the God centered mysticism of the Traditional Mass.

Just look at the self destruction of the Monasteries and the Jesuits since the council and the imposition of the Novus Ordo……this has to stop. Either it will stop when “We have become Dead” …..or we will have to bring it to an end, and admit that we took a very wrong turn back in the 60’s.

You don’t seem like you want to stop, you seem like you want to go on because you missed the bus. And you don’t want to stand in the rain waiting for another bus to take you all the way back to where you started.

You are not alone. You are in very good company…you’ll have to fight with bishops if you want a seat out of the rain.

Montford D. Naylor, Jr.

This article is so accurate that it is amazing that its contents have not be recognized before now. I thank God that this message is finally forthcoming. As a deacon I have been mocked and ridiculed by most of my peers for my “overly reverent” behavior during the Mass. Yet the lay parishioners have universally come to me and thanked me for that behavior. I was beginning to wonder if we would ever learn the importance of reverence and submission to Jesus in our lives as well as in the Eucharistic Sacramental rite.

Flylow95

I share the view I read somewhere that participating in the Latin Mass when you didn’t speak or understand Latin was to allow, be open to, and have Faith that The Holy Spirit would strengthen your Faith, NOT your understanding of the words, or whether or not you could see the Priest’s face as he prayed to God for you or on your behalf. Unfortunately those who would rather the Priest turn his back to GOD rather than to themselves, won the vote. Maybe that is why many Bishops chose to take the Tabernacle and set GOD aside altogether, so the Priest did not turn his back to GOD. As for the Tradition of The Latin Mas in the Church, the Latin Mass lost to those who ignore Tradition. HOWEVER, Jesus told Peter, what you bind on Earth is bound in Heaven, so I bow to the Authority given the Church to do as it sees fit. So I go to the new and modern Mass and respect it, after all IT IS STILL THE MASS. Sorry, one last thing. Moses had Authority from God also. He authorized a Bill of Divorce, but Jesus said; Matthew 19: xx 7 They say to him: Why then did Moses command to give a bill of divorce, and to put away? 8 He says to them: Because Moses by reason of the hardness of your heart permitted you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. As Moses did contrary to God, so The Church sometimes commands contrary to God, and God endures it. For a time. In The Diary of St Faustina, Jesus tells St Faustina to do as her Confessor tells her if it contrary to what He tells her. God puts great weight in Obedience.

Flylow95

A PRESIDER? It offends in what it does not say more than what it does say. The Priesthood makes a man a Priest. Anyone can be a presider. And what a shame and what a cheat it is to the laity that a mere Deacon performs parts of The Holy Mass while a Priest sits idle and presides.

http://twitter.com/goodwordjohn John McNulty

Some people treat Mass as if it were a social event.

PopePiusXII1939_1958

Totally right, your comment is fit and correct, that’s how it was before the council. Although certain changes were needed, and the mass in the vernacular was indeed a good idea, the abuse came when prayers were shortened, some done away with all together, others changed to lose through meaning, and from simply celebrating the Tridentine mass into English etc we had a new mass forming a mass which was highly ‘ecumanised’ with the scope of uniting heretics back to the Catholic faith, we all know that this in fact was condemned by St.Pius V but thank God things are just STARTING to get back up on track, with a lot of work that needs to be done.

Silvana

I come from a long line of very devoted Catholics. My ancestor Ignace Michael III Jarweh was the Patriarch of the Syrian Catholic church from 1783 to 1800. In fact he was responsible for reestablishing the Catholic church in that part of the world since the death in 1702 of Ignatius Peter Sahbadin. I used to be a Catholic and left the church many years ago because of the many abuses and unwelcomed changes in the church introduced over the years. I did use perhaps the wrong wording there and yes I agree that the bread and wine becomes the body and blood of Christ, but to say that I am abusing the church is quite offensive to me!

Neville DeVilliers

It isn’t liturgical abuse Fr. Bux and Cardinal Burke need to be concerned about. It is the abuse of an outmoded hierarchy continuing to delude itself. In a total state of denial to what is happening around them and the fact that the average person in the pew sees them and the papacy itself as irrelevant and out of date.

Aging Papist

I can say as a former altar boy from the Tridentine days, rapidly recited masses were very common. Anyone thinking a return to the 1962 Mass is going to be a picnic, a return to liturgical nirvana is kidding himself. I was glad to see Vatican II put it on the shelf. I still think it should stay there. Even if we’ve had to endure a terribly inferior replacement since then. The best Novus Ordo liturgy available today can still said the Anglican Usage “Book of Divine Worship” and in the “Common Prayer Book”, 1983 edition used in the CofE..

The Church of England has a lot to teach the Roman Church. I fear too many Catholics don’t want to listen or to learn.

Kennyinliverpool

The obsession with Latin is quite misleading – Latin became the official language of the church because it was functional to do so not because it has some innate magical property. The Church has now grown outside of the region where Latin has a historical connection and it makes little sense to make Africans and Asians have Mass in Latin. I think that’s why it was changed in Vatican II, because Latin was becoming an unnecessary barrier.

Kennyinliverpool

I am 25 and have only been to one Latin Mass (in Liverpool) – it was TERRIBLE. The priest was angry – like a lot of crazies who post on this site and mumbled the words and could not preach — but apparently that was what pre-Vatican II Catholicism was like??? A return to former glory might not be what’s needed!? The problem is that a lot of priests are not good at preaching or liturgy and drive people away by their lack of pastoral support… but at leas they claim to be celibate and that’s all we want in a religious leader?